By borrowing your analogy, the general sentiment with the iPhone was excitement and interest when it came out. I just don't see it in the folks around me regarding EVs (price is high, charging is pain). Yes, it's the future, but a future that is way ahead. We aren't even at the point where those old "devices" start to show their age. I'd say Symbians and Ericssons still have time.
People also forget that the iPhone wasn't what we have today - it was an iPod that made phone calls, and that alone was enough "for most people" - huge swaths of people had iPods and a cell phone so even if it had been mediocre it would have succeeded.
I've had a similar experience, my Xavier NX stopped working after the last update and now it's just collecting dust. To be honest, I've found the Nvidia SBC to be more of a hassle than it's worth.
My Jetson TX2 developer kit didn't stop working, but it's on a very out of date Linux distribution.
Maybe if Nvidia makes it to four trillion in market cap they'll have enough spare change to keep these older boards properly supported, or at least upstream all the needed support.
Back in 2018 I've been involved in a product development based on TX2. I had to untangle the entire nasty mess of Bash and Python spaghetti that is JetPack SDK to get everything sensibly integrated into our custom firmware build system and workflow (no, copying your application files over prebaked rootfs on a running board is absolutely NOT how it's normally done). You basically need a few deb packages with nvidia libs for your userspace, and swipe a few binaries from Jetpack that have to be run with like 20 undocumented arguments in right order to do the rest (image assembly, flashing, signing, secure boot stuff, etc), the rest of the system could be anything. Right when I was finished, a 3rd party Yocto layer implementing essentially the same stuff that I came up with, and the world could finally forget about horrors of JetPack for good. I also heard that it has somewhat improved later on, but I have not touch any NVidia SoCs since (due to both trauma and moving to a different field).
Edit: It's been a while since I did this, but I had to manually build the kernel, overwrite a dtb file maybe (and Linux_for_Tegra/bootloader/l4t_initrd.img) and run something like this (for xavier)
If you spent enough time and energy on it.. I'm fairly confident you could get the newest Ubuntu running. You'd have to build your own kernel, manually generate the initramfs, figure out how to and then flash it. You'd probably run into stupid little problems like the partition table the flash script makes doesn't allocate enough space for the kernel you've built.. I'm sure there would be hiccups, at the very least, but everything's out there to do it.
Wait, my AGX is still working, but I have kept it offline and away from updates. Do the updates kill it? Or is it a case of not supporting newer pytorch or something else you need?
It looks like it's much easy to setup DoH with blocky. Blocky's DoT doesn't work for me but it's a pain to setup with Pi-hole and it's impossible to make DoH work in Pi-hole.
My friends in third-world countries get faster and less expensive service than me in Silicon Valley. On top of that, there is no fiber connection in my neighborhood, and they've been on fiber for over 5 years. And there is a data cap also. It's just crazy and sad.
I live in Perú, and I have 400Mbps internet FTTH with no data cap, and the price is 37 USD [1], the competition of the internet providers is incredibly good for the consumers.
The lowest plan that mi ISP offers is 100Mbps and is at 21 USD.
If you develop later you can leapfrog countries that ground through all the necessary phases for the development to happen for everyone globally. But that doesn't mean you can keep pace. Hopefully your area gets an upgrade, or a Starlink, soon.
It boggles my mind that Google Fiber has been available in Austin, TX for 10 years but is still not available in the communities next door to Google HQ.
Probably due to the extreme level of veto-ism in the Bay Area. Everyone wants internet, but if 5 people complaining about yards or roads being dug up can get work to stop indefinitely, costs are going through the roof. There's far more uncertainty in that political environment than anywhere else.
For reference, I live in a small town of ~6,000 people, and we're getting fiber laid. For the longest time we only had 25mbps, and then a new provider came in with coaxial and offered 200mbps (with a data cap), and now a third is laying fiber.
Our average income is $34k/year, so it's not because we have more money than the opulent Bay Area.
It could simply be that poor people don't complain about infrastructure projects like rich people too. Or they don't have the tools/connections to effectively stop it.
I imagine if you are renting a property, you are less likely to complain about things going on around the property because it's not your property to "defend." If you own (and especially if you are part of an HOA) you might be more likely to complain if there is construction going on for 3+ months in your neighborhood.
So it probably does fall into rich vs poor in the same way that renters may be less likely to be rich.
Google announced they would bring service to San Jose, along with about 20? other locations, and then later in the week, AT&T announced they would bring fiber to the listed communities in their ILEC territory and a couple more for good measure. And then a few months later, AT&T started rolling it out. Google hadn't figured out how to access poles or where they wanted equipment by the time AT&T was offering service, so they gave up. They did get some new service areas through aquisition, but I don't think they've announced any new construction service areas in a very long time now.
> Broadband penetration as of June 2017: 23.5 broadband connections for every 100 people.
> Distribution of broadband connections by type, as reported by Ancom, is as follows 94% FTTx (FTTH/FTTB/FTTC/FTTN) internet access connections, 4.8% Coaxial cable, 0.2% other.
Now guess the country. Answer in ROT13 at [1]. Hint: it ain't a first world country. Another hint: Latine loquitur. Oh and it ain't a recent development either. They've been at it like forever.
Are they in geographic region that is more densely populated? Or an area that was built out more recently? In my last house (also in SV) the choices were between Comcast and AT&T copper. The latter went up to 6/1, so was effectively useless. I'm sure it was laid down decades ago.
They are in a densely populated area. The city had issues with internet service for quite a while. The government started to invest heavily in fiber tech around the 2010s, and fast forward to now, almost everyone in the city can get a fiber connection to their home or apartment building. The cost is around ~28$ for 300Mbs and $80 for 1Gbs.
Yes. Providers in India offer far more speed at far cheaper prices than US. The key to this is competition. There are many providers available in each major city which helps consumer. It's sad that in many US' major cities there is usually one or two providers only for a building or neighborhood. My building in SF only has comcast, so they have a monopoly and can charge whatever they want.
"faster" here is relative. unless you live in eastern USA or western Europe, you'd be lucky to see half the quoted "speed", since that is where the majority of the internet resides
Is there a way to fight it? I sent a message to our state reps. (Gov. Newsom, Sen. Becker and Assembly member Berman) but can't think of anything else.
I see in this a subliminal message - "We are full. Move out of the state."
There is not enough electricity for everybody, and it seems like conservation is not an option. So these companies will try to squeeze the working class even more. The problem, there is not enough juice left for me to give.
> There is not enough electricity for everybody, and it seems like conservation is not an option.
That is not the issue. The issue is that distributed generation (i.e., rooftop solar) has become so popular that charging only by per-kW charges has become a subsidy from working class (who are less likely to participate in such generation) to wealthier segments who do.
> So these companies will try to squeeze the working class even more.
This proposal would reduce total bills for the working class, by splitting the rate into a mix of fixed fee and a (lower than current) is per-kW rate, and giving the working class a discount on the fixed fee.
It would raise total costs for those generating their own power (because of lower per-kW rates) and for the wealthy (who would pay above the average cost on the fixed fee, and particularly on people who are both.)
This would reduce the incentive to new distributed generation slightly (but then, given that both widespread adoption has been achieved and there is now a residential construction mandate for that, the effect of incentives is less.)
> This proposal would reduce total bills for the working class.
I sure hope so, but I still doubt whether it will happen. I'm sorry for my ignorance on the topic, and I need to research it more. But it is counter-intuitive to me.
We pay much more than the rest of the country already. We are the utility's source of revenue. We should get a fair price if we generate enough electricity through solar and other means by switching to market rates.
Why can't they just adjust the expense for those who generate electricity? Or directly lower the incentive by removing tax cuts and credits since the widespread adoption is ongoing anyway. I am still trying to understand why I have to share costs with wealthy people without clear benefits.
> I am still trying to understand why I have to share costs with wealthy people without clear benefits.
You aren’t sharing costs with wealthy people.
The proposal is to split rates into fixed connection costs and variable electricity costs, rather than, as the status quo does, lumping it all into the latter and setting rates high enough that on average the connection costs are covered by the surplus of the per-kW charges.
The effect of the status quo is that net metering over-rewards net-metered distributed generators (which was a plus to drive adoption, but no longer needed an excess incentive because of widespread adoption and a construction mandate) but it also creates an artificial disincentive to moving residential natural gas use to cleaner electric and against moving gasoline vehicle use to cleaner BEVs.
Dropping the per-kW rates and separating out the connection charge deals with that problem.
> Why can't they just adjust the expense for those who generate electricity? Or directly lower the incentive by removing tax cuts and credits since the widespread adoption is ongoing anyway.
Because distributed generation is only part of the issue, and that doesn’t deal with the disincentived to electrification of current fossil fuel use created by the currently-inflated per-kWh charge.
> We should get a fair price if we generate enough electricity through solar and other means by switching to market rates.
proposal asks you to pay not for electricity, but for maintaining grid infra, which they keep for you even you don't utilize it much. Cut yourself from the grid and you will pay nothing.
> This proposal would reduce total bills for the working class.
Not hardly. 180k household income is working class in California. This will drastically increase bills for many working class folks, those same working class that has been screwed over already with the lie sold about solar reducing costs. Because let’s be realistic here, a vast majority of people that installed solar did it for electricity bill reduction. It did, until this years.
This state is simply and completely captured by industry. We should not be passing laws to boost profit for a for-profit company.
Can't agree more. I don't care about a personal cubicle with a door. But I care how much time I spend in traffic on my way to and back from the office.
